Slots of confusion

Thursday

May 2, 2013 at 9:00 AM

There were, to say the least, some interesting moments during the second of two public meetings earlier this month centered on a slots parlor that could wind up on the barren land where Wyman-Gordon manufacturing once thrived. Rush Street Gaming (RSG) head Neil Bluhm, for example, told city officials he had struck a deal guaranteeing 100 percent of the construction jobs tied to his proposed slots parlor would be given to Worcester trade union employees. It was, however, his big reveal that his plans do not hinge on the full-service hotel that developer Richard Friedman says he would build in conjunction with the slots parlor, which had some councilors’ eyes as big as saucers.

ABOVE: Rush Street Gaming CEO Greg Carlin and Head Neil Bluhm at a recent meeting about the proposed slots parlor in Worcester with city officials and members of the public.

There were, to say the least, some interesting moments during the second of two public meetings earlier this month centered on a slots parlor that could wind up on the barren land where Wyman-Gordon manufacturing once thrived. Rush Street Gaming (RSG) head Neil Bluhm, for example, told city officials he had struck a deal guaranteeing 100 percent of the construction jobs tied to his proposed slots parlor would be given to Worcester trade union employees. It was, however, his big reveal that his plans do not hinge on the full-service hotel that developer Richard Friedman says he would build in conjunction with the slots parlor, which had some councilors&rsquo; eyes as big as saucers.

Just about everyone locally thought the hotel, which is said to be eyed for the downtown CitySquare area, and Bluhm&rsquo;s slots parlor were a bride and groom &ndash; a package deal. That is what some councilors thought, but it is not what they heard from Bluhm at the meeting. When District 3 Councilor George Russell asked just how a hotel fi ts in with a slots parlor, Bluhm offered this nugget: &ldquo;It was our understanding the city would like to see a full-service hotel downtown. It was really the city&rsquo;s suggestion, not our suggestion. We&rsquo;re not doing the hotel just for the casino. If you want us to give the subsidy and not do the hotel, we&rsquo;re willing to do that. This is up to you all. We&rsquo;re open.&rdquo;

That was news to the ears of some councilors.

&ldquo;I was very surprised to learn that the hotel had no connection to the casino and that it was a request of the city,&rdquo; At-Large Councilor Joe O&rsquo;Brien says, adding he knows of no one on the city side who ever made such a request.

RSG CEO Greg Carlin says he also does not recall whether anyone from the city approached the gaming company about including a hotel with the slots proposal. He says Friedman, who had been looking to build a hotel in Worcester, reached out to Rush Street because he recognized an opportunity to bring much-needed hotel rooms to the city. Under the proposal, slot machine revenues, to the tune of $1 million a year, would be paid to Friedman to subsidize the hotel.

A representative for Friedman, who heads up Carpenter and Company in Cambridge, tells Worcester Mag he was in India last week and unavailable for comment.

The hotel is thought to be the centerpiece of what would be a mitigation package included in a host community agreement negotiated with City Manager Mike O&rsquo;Brien. Some councilors say they walked out of their initial one-on-one meetings in Mayor Joe Petty&rsquo;s office with Bluhm, Friedman, Carlin and others under the impression that there was no wiggle room &ndash; the slots parlor and hotel went hand-in-hand.

&ldquo;I always thought the hotel was part of the package, let&rsquo;s put it that way,&rdquo; District 1 Councilor Tony Economou says. &ldquo;There seems to be some question as to what&rsquo;s going on. There&rsquo;s talk about 600 jobs, but I believe that includes the hotel. My understanding from day 1 was that it was always a package deal. From the beginning, that&rsquo;s how it was presented to me.&rdquo;

That is what he thought the message was during his brief meeting with the developers. &ldquo;I was curious, myself, once I heard when he said, &lsquo;We didn&rsquo;t ask for the hotel, the city asked for it,&rdquo; Economou says. &ldquo;Quite frankly, that should be in the host agreement. Both [construction on the slots parlor and the hotel] should start simultaneously. Let&rsquo;s make sure it&rsquo;s ironclad.&rdquo;

Joe O&rsquo;Brien says he questions whether the city should be giving some of its mitigation to a hotel developer. &ldquo;[Bluhm] is saying we have so much money to give to the city, but right now the city has identified $1 million to a hotel as its top priority,&rdquo; O&rsquo;Brien says. &ldquo;Is giving $1 million to a hotel the top priority? My thought is, I thought the hotel was always a necessary part of the casino project. That&rsquo;s a little surprising to me, I guess.&rdquo;

O&rsquo;Brien says, like other officials, he wants a new hotel in the city, especially with high-profile destinations such as the DCU and The Hanover Theatre, and with DCU offi cials lamenting their inability to compete for such large-scale events as the NCAA men&rsquo;s basketball tournament. He wonders, however, just what the city should give up for it.

&ldquo;If,&rdquo; he says, &ldquo;we&rsquo;re going to live with a casino and whatever the mitigation figure is, would you prioritize giving $1 million to a hotel?&rdquo;

Which leads back to what Bluhm said, something Carlin backed up recently.

&ldquo;Maybe the confusion is, from our perspective, we could do this without the hotel,&rdquo; Carlin says. &ldquo;We don&rsquo;t need the hotel.&rdquo;

Have a news tip or story idea? Email Walter at wbird@worcestermag.com, or call him at 508-749-3166, ext. 243. Follow Walter on Twitter @walterbirdjr and catch him every Thursday morning at 8:35 with Paul Westcott on WTAG 580AM.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.